In the context of recent large-scale migratory flows from North Africa to the European Union, significant convergence and overlap has been observed between human trafficking and migrant smuggling, and between ‘economic’ and ‘forced’ migration. This paper draws on the case of Nigerian women asylum seekers, most of whom are identified as potential victims of human trafficking, to illustrate the problems that arise when migrants are separated into discrete categories—trafficked/smuggled, voluntary/forced—to establish their treatment. These problems derive from the application of rigid bureaucratic labels to increasingly fluid migratory identities, and from gendered and neo-colonial stereotypes that inform views of agency and vulnerability. The paper discusses vulnerability as a core concept in the construction of the ‘deserving victim’ in order to critique stereotypical representations of ‘vulnerable subjects’ in light of feminist political philosophy and philosophy of law. In doing so, it highlights the role of receiving states in producing migrant women’s vulnerability, and argues that state institutions have a duty to both guarantee protection and acknowledge the subjects’ agency.

Abstract. Feminist approaches to prostitution tend to be highly polarised in their theo­retical premises and policy implications. Radical feminist perspectives represent prostitution as the cornerstone of women’s sexual exploitation, implying a strong call to eradicate sexual commerce in any form. On the opposite side are liberal perspectives emphasising women’s choice, autonomy, and control over their own body, advocating for the decriminalisation of sex work, and rejecting paternalist claims for State protection. The notion of “women’s consent” is crucial in both perspectives, being rejected as impossible or inexistent by those who reduce all sexual commerce to forced prostitution, and emphasized as a key discriminant by those distinguishing voluntary sex work from trafficking and forced prostitution, and sexual agents from sexual victims. In my contribution, I argue that the polarized nature of dominant feminist approaches to prostitution – especially concerned with defending theoretical stances on pros­titution – may decrease the impact of feminist-inspired policies and fail to address the needs and risks faced by those working in the sex market. Arguing that there is continuity rather than dichotomy between force and consent, I suggest more nuanced and problematic notions of victimisation and agency. Relying on ideas of human vulnerability, such as those developed by philosophers Judith Butler, Adriana Cavarero, and Martha Fineman, I present a feminist political approach to prostitution that, while rejecting any appeal to criminal laws against non-coerced adult sex work, criticises laissez-faire approaches, and advocates for social policies catering for sex workers’ material and symbolic needs.